Interactive Election Game: 2016 (TURN 5)

[UWS]

Once I have the Sanders' debate answers I'll upload the debate.

Thank you.

NHI

Even if its during the day?

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

LESTER HOLT: Good evening from Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. I'm Lester Holt, anchor of "NBC Nightly News." I want to welcome you to the first presidential debate.

The participants tonight are Marco Rubio, Elizabeth Warren, Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders. This debate is sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. The commission drafted tonight's format, and the rules have been agreed to by the campaigns.

The 90-minute debate is divided into six segments, each 15 minutes long. We'll explore three topic areas tonight: Achieving prosperity; America's direction; and securing America. At the start of each segment, I will ask the same lead-off question to both candidates, and they will each have up to two minutes to respond. From that point until the end of the segment, we'll have an open discussion.

The questions are mine and have not been shared with the commission or the campaigns. The audience here in the room has agreed to remain silent so that we can focus on what the candidates are saying.

I will invite you to applaud, however, at this moment, as we welcome the candidates: Democratic nominee for president of the United States,Elizabeth Warren, and Republican nominee for president of the United States, Marco Rubio, and the two independent candidates for President Senator Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul.

(APPLAUSE)

LLet's jump right into it: We're calling this opening segment "Achieving Prosperity." And central to that is jobs. There are two economic realities in America today. There's been a record six straight years of job growth, and new census numbers show incomes have increased at a record rate after years of stagnation. However, income inequality remains significant, and nearly half of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.

Beginning with you, Senator Warren, why are you a better choice than your opponent to create the kinds of jobs that will put more money into the pockets of American works?

I'm a better choice than Senator Rubio or Congressman Paul because the large tax cuts they suggest simply do not work. Their idea of trickle-down economics, contrary to the theory described only increases the Federal Deficit, and does not add any more revenue to the economy.


Senator Rubio, the same question to you. It's about putting money -- more money into the pockets of American workers. You have up to two minutes.

Thank you Lester. Thank you Senator Warren, Senator Sanders and Congressman Paul for being here tonight. And I want to thank the Hofstra university for hosting this debate, a great moment of democracy in which the American people has a choice to make. Because this election is about what kind of future we will give to America and to our children, including my four children. As a young, boy, I was raised paycheck to paycheck and despite their struggles, my parents succeeded to adapt in this new society called America and managed to make their children better-off than they were. So I understand the struggles of everyday Americans. As a son of Cuban immigrants, I understand what it means to lose the gift of freedom and opportunity, both principles that are only possible through the defense, preservation and reinforcement of the American Dream.

We are now witnessing the slowest economic progress in America's history. Right now, the unemployment rate is remaining stuck around 5 %. We are still dependent on foreign energy, our jobs and companies are shipping overseas, we are less competitive in the world economy, education is less accessible for our people. We can't settle this situation by having four more years like the last eight years as Senator Warren is running to continue Barack Obama's trickle-down government in which a bigger government taxes more, regulates more and spends more. We need to follow a different path to economic prosperity.

My plan has seven basic parts : number one, cutting taxes and regulations for all Americans, including the middle class, in order to reinforce their purchasing power as well as consumption because consumption is one of the important strengths of our economy. Number two, getting us to energy independence by taking advantage of our oil, gas, coal, nuclear, solar, wind, hydroelectricity, etc. Number three, pursuing our quest for open markets around the world in order to make America competitive in the world economy through lower tariffs and corporate tax reduction for America from 40 % to 20 %. Number four, promoting school choice to make sure our people have the skills they need to succeed and the best schools in the world. Number five, balancing the budget. Number six, investing a part of future budget surpluses in the development of infrastructure in order to facilitate economic activities and the implementation of new businesses here in America. And number seven, making America the best place in the world to do business, because it's businesses, including small businesses, that create most of the jobs in America. I am sitting in the U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship and in the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. I know what it takes to help creating jobs, to get small business working again and to lead America to prosperity. That's how we're going to restore America's prosperity and get America to a New American Century.

Now Congressman Paul and Senator Sanders if either of you would like to weigh in:

Well Lester, I think I'm better than my opponents to bring economic prosperity and jobs to our country because my plane involves two main things, the first one is getting the government out of the economy and business, I plan to do this by cutting regulations and taxes, I want to abolish income tax, I want to reduce our taxes on corporations and our business because this way, they will have more money to create more jobs and the average american will also have more money to do more things he wants to do! About the regulations, I want to cut many regulations, by having regulations we only destroy small business who can't afford the cost and help big business who can't, but at the same time, we make them pay more and fire more people, by having regulations, we destroy jobs!

The second thing I was talking about, and here is where I'm different from Marco, is that I want to leave corporatist deals like the TPP, the TPP is not transparent, it pushes for more global and big government, it only helps the big corporations while hurting small business with regulations, the TPP will not help our country, but hurt it, while Marco wants to stay in it, like he showed everyone by voting yes to fast track it, I have always opposed it, and I still oppose it, because it won't bring economic prosperity to us.

I have been calling this theory out for the last 30 years, whether I was a Mayor, Congressman or Senator. The theory behind trickle-down economics is that the rich will reinvest their money into the economy. Well, that's been proven not to work. The repeal of Glass-Steagall has opened up the banks to do whatever the hell they want with the American people's money.

I believe in what I refer to as trickle-up economics. What this entails is raising taxes on the rich-not to the 91% of Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, so forget about that-and raise the minimum wage. A wealthy person will invest maybe 5-10% of their annual earnings into the economy. A working or middle class person-of which I grew up as- will out of necessity, reinvest all of their money into the economy to purchase food and other consumer goods. That is trickle-up economics, and with the boom-bust cycle we find that trickle-down economics has put us in, maybe it's time we tried something different.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: OK, you are unpacking a lot here. And we're still on the issue of achieving prosperity. And I want to talk about taxes. The fundamental difference between the two of you concerns the wealthy.


Senator Warren and Senator Sanders, both of you are calling for a tax increase on the wealthiest Americans. I'd like you to further defend that. And, Senator Rubio and Congressman Paul, you're calling for tax cuts for the wealthy. I'd like you to defend that. And this next two-minute answer goes to you, Mr. Rubio, an then to Mr. Paul:

First of all, Lester, my plan is to cut taxes for all the American people, including the middle class and lower income Americans. Because we can't have a strong America without a strong middle class. Cutting taxes for all the American people is the path required to restore America's economic prosperity because it tax cuts as well as tax reform will reinforce our consumers' purchasing power, thus encouraging consumption because consumption is one of the main pillars of a free market economy like America. It will also help working class families to raise their children and to ensure their access to education.

Meanwhile, Senator Warren has pledged to be a voice in the room on behalf of the middle class families, but she failed miserably.

Congress had Warren overseeing how our consumers' tax dollars were spent on tarp bailouts, bailing out the same banks that helped cause the financial collapse, bailouts that handed a big bonus to bank executives while middle class Americans lost out. Later, Warren went on a charm offensive with some of the same banks who got bailed out. Senator Warren also supports Dodd-Frank, a policy that made big banks bigger because the government made them big by imposing thousands of pages of regulations. Unlike small banks, big banks are able to deal with all these regulations because they have an army of lawyers and compliance officers, thus making big banks bigger while small banks are struggling to lend or to exist. Dodd-Frank is also eviscerating small businesses and small banks since it wiped out 40 % of small and mid-size banks that loan money to small businesses, which bankrupted small businesses, killed tens of thousands of jobs and drastically raised the unemployment rate. Since Dodd-Frank was signed into law in 2010, community banks’ market share has withered by 12 %, twice as fast as it did the previous five years. This has snuffed out the creation of businesses in the American communities that have the greatest need for new jobs and new economic activity. So Senator Warren is supporting a policy that puts the special interests of Wall Street individuals ahead of the needs of America's middle class and hard working families.

Her running mate Sherrod Brown voted against the Small Business Tax Fairness Act of 2000 that reduced taxes on small businesses and increased the minimum wage and also opposed the JOBS Act which cut regulatory burdens on small and medium-sized businesses making it easier for them to raise capital and create jobs. No wonder that Senator Brown voted over 35 times to raise taxes.

Senator Warren is seeking to pursue Barack Obama's failed big government policies that increased taxes and regulations on the American people, crushed the middle class, shipped American businesses overseas, made us dependent on foreign energy and made us less competitive in the world economy.

The right way to make this economy working for all the American people is to reduce taxes and to make America the best place in the world to do business. We're going to do this through tax reform, repealing Dodd-Frank in order to help smaller banks to recover and to get small businesses growing again to create jobs and hire people. If I'm President, we're going to get America to energy independence by abolishing regulations on coal industry, which will bring coal mining jobs in America and increase electricity production and increase Americans' access to heating, by promoting oil drilling and by using a part of revenues from oil drilling to help developing renewable energies. By cutting taxes and regulations on businesses, including small businesses. reducing the cost of doing business and lowering our corporate tax rate in half, we will not only increase our businesses' dynamism, competitiveness, productivity and ability to create jobs but will also make our trade deals fairer and more advantageous for America and bring American jobs back to this country while helping America to increase its competitiveness in the world economy through lower tariffs and lower costs of trading that will get more international consumers for America, a goal that will also be accomplished by tax cuts and regulation cuts on America's manufacturing industry.

The American people, including the middle class, has a choice to make : four more years of big government policies crushing the middle class or a brighter future making the American Dream possible again through a stronger economy and a stronger middle class thanks to free enterprise and free market solutions. You will earn the latter option if I'm elected President.



Paul: Just like I said in the last question, I want to decrease taxes, not only on the rich, but on everyone, my plan is to abolish the 16th amendment and abolish income tax, I don't want to replace it with anything, we will abolish it, because the income tax is most degrading and totalitarian of all possible taxes! The income tax is basically a way to the government to say that it owns your lives and your labor. While some might say that this will destroy our economy, it won't, most of our revenue does not come from income tax, more than half of our revenue doesn't come from it, it comes from other things like excise taxes and tariffs

I also seek to abolish the IRS, it only adds to the complexity of our tax code and ads to making it unsustainable, I went to Brazil in 2014, and during the time I was there I saw how I was in fact right about taxes, Brazil has an tax code that if you print and make a book, the book will have the weight of two hippos! And I'm not even joking, a man actually did this, this is the level of complexity of their tax code, now look how their economy is going! It is currently in a horrible state, it has an high inflation, high unemployment, their growth is low... The complexity of their tax code obviously wasn't the only reason, but it helped a lot, that's why I'm supporting, just like I always supported, that we should abolish the IRS.




HOLT: Senator Warren and Senator Sanders two minutes for each of you, and Senator are there any differences in your economic plans?
Warren: Lester, it's really simple. More taxes, equals more revenue for the Government, and since the wealthy are the people who have the most money, it makes the most sense that their taxes go up.

Sanders:Our wealthiest citizens have gotten away with gaming the American people since the 1980s. If you want an example of how trickle-down economics has failed, look at Kansas. Sam Brownback, the Republican Governor of Kansas, has cut taxes to the bone, and now the state government there is in the midst of an economic crisis because they simply do not have enough money to function, and make no mistake, that is what Republicans want to do on a national level.

Contrast this with Minnesota, of which my good friend Mark Dayton is the Governor. Republicans predicted an economic disaster in that state. What he has done is raise taxes on the rich by $2.1 billion, increased public spending and raised his state's minimum wage. The results are the complete opposite to Kansas. Unemployment is down massively, private sector earnings are at $891, 47,000 new jobs have been added, and he has a $1.8 billion surplus. That is what I want to do on a national scale, because it works.

HOLT: Senator Warren and Senator Sanders two minutes for each of you, and Senator are there any differences in your economic plans?

Honestly, there is not much. However, again, there are two questions that need to be answered. 1) What experience does my colleague from Massachusetts have in executive office? I am the only candidate up here tonight who has ever held executive office before. I know how to manage public programs with the concerns of our private sector; I cannot say the same for my colleague.

Secondly, can you trust someone who wouldn't reveal that she was colluding with the Democratic National Committee to deny a fair nominating process? Why did she not reveal it the second she knew about it if she knew it was wrong? Can she be trusted? If you asked me a year ago, I would've said yes without hesitation, now I'm not so certain.[/i]

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: Senator Rubio, you've been critical of Senator Warren's plan to help working families, while at the same time she's criticized you for favoring the wealthiest Americans? Specifically, Senator how do you propose helping the plight of working families and is the solution more than just a tax cut?

Well, throughout this campaign, Senator Warren has been lecturing me about living paycheck to paycheck. I was raised paycheck to paycheck. And saying that my tax plan will cut taxes only for riches is simply not true. As President, I will cut taxes for all Americans from the bottom to the top, including the middle class and over the last eight years, the middle class has been crushed by the Obama administration's taxes and regulations. We need to reverse that situation.

And like I said earlier, the solution is not only to cut taxes but also to reduce wasteful government spending, making America energy independent by taking advantage of all of our sources of energy, encouraging free trade, improving our education system through school choice and balancing the budget. The solution is not to make rich people poorer, but to make poor people richer.

Senator Warren doesn't understand how the economy works. We are not the strongest economy in the world because of big government. Free enterprise is a basic element of America's economic prosperity. Businesses create jobs and most of jobs come from small business. Thanks to the hard work of the American people, we can promote opportunity. America is strongest economy in the world because of the ingenuity and entrepreneurship and hard work of the American people. That's why I want to make America the business-friendly environment in the world, which requires lowering the fiscal burden on all Americans of all incomes and on all businesses of all sizes. That's how working families will be awarded of their hard work, will earn a stronger purchasing power, will be able to raise their children and will finally enjoy the experience of the American Dream here on the land of opportunity.

Senator Warren has forgot that even President Kennedy, a Democrat, cut taxes during his presidency in order to boost economic growth. Thanks to these tax cuts put in place by President Kennedy, the economy accelerated and prospered, the GDP expanded by an average of 5.5% from early 1961 to late 1963, inflation was down at around 1 %, the unemployment rate declined from 6.6 % to 5.6 % during Kennedy's two years in the White House, industrial production rose by 15 % and motor vehicle sales rose by 40 %. That's why we need to reduce taxes for all Americans.

Senator Warren, you may be from the same political party as Jack Kennedy, you may be from the same state as Jack Kennedy and you may have had a member of the Kennedy family among your students when you were a teacher at the Harvard University, but Senator you're no Jack Kennedy.


HOLT: Senator Sanders, you describe yourself as a Democratic-Socialist and take a variety of positions on issues different from Senator Warrens. Two minutes Senator define a Democratic-Socialist, and moreover why are you the better choice for progressive Americans, than the Democratic nominee?

Sanders:Why am I a better choice for progressives? Take a look at my record. I have held the same positions all my life, and even through my career in politics. For my 30 years of public service, I have fought for the middle and working classes in this country, which is where I come from. I know how government operates.

And what is a democratic socialist? Simply put, it is a left-winger who is not afraid to publically stand up for their beliefs and risk being ostracized by the media. Someone who believes in higher wages, higher taxes for the rich, ending subsidies to Big Oil, and investing in our future. We don't believe in government control of consumer goods; that's just plain nonsense.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: And Senator Warren, follow up: Do you consider yourself a Democratic socialist?

Warren: While many of my ideas could be considered Socialism, I am not a socialist. I did vote for Republican candidates in the distant past, so I think that disqualifies me from being a socialist.

HOLT: Congressman Paul, your turn, you are still a Republican, yet your campaign is based on challenging Senator Rubio over a 'lack of Republican and constitutional values' explain what you mean by that sir?

Paul: Paul: Well, the fact is that Rubio represents the political establishment, the one who defends the Patriot Act, the NSA surveillance, both which are unconstitutional and the TPP which I wouldn't call Republican, mainly because it pushes for a big globalist government.

Rubio already shown a bad knowledge of the constitution last week when he said that my running mate, Andrew Napolitano was breaking freedom of press, but the fact is that freedom of press defends the press of against government censorship, not against people criticizing it! Criticizing the media is part of freedom of speech and Mr. Rubio apparently forgotten this, this situation is even stranger when you consider the fact that Napolitano worked on the media... Rubio, and not only him but other mainstream republicans, don't defend the constitution as a whole, they defend parts of it, the defend the second amendment, some of them support the first amendment, most of them forget about the fourth amendment, since they support the PATRIOT Act, which directly violates it, so I think Rubio lacks these values that were defended by our founding fathers, not all of them, but some of them, and also seems to not confuse some things about our constitution.

He's support of the TPP, which in my view is anti republican was seen when he voted to fast track it, he also supported it in the primary and only now in the actual election he started saying that he would make a new version, but until the end of the primary, he was for it, he voted to fast track it, he voted in favor of big globalist government, and I don't think that is republican



HOLT: Well, we're well behind schedule, so I want to move to our next segment. We move into our next segment talking about America's direction. And let's start by talking about race.

The share of Americans who say race relations are bad in this country is the highest it's been in decades, much of it amplified by shootings of African-Americans by police, as we've seen recently in Charlotte and Tulsa. Race has been a big issue in this campaign, and one of you is going to have to bridge a very wide and bitter gap.

So how do you heal the divide? Senator Sanders you get two minutes on this.

Sanders: There is a cynicism in our poorest neighborhoods brought on by economic inequality. The social Darwinism that is being proposed by Senator Rubio is not going to rectify this. What is going to rectify this is compassion, and a desire to help.

We can help by investing in public education, so more working and middle class children can afford to get a high-quality education. We need to create a nationwide infrastructure program-which is a core issue of my campaign-to provide thousands, if not millions of new jobs. We need to train our federal officers in de-escalation tactics; prioritizing negotiation over force and encourage states to do the same; but we can't force them to.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: Now Congressman Paul, turning to you. You've been criticized for a series of newsletters you've written back in the nineties, many which have accused of having overtly racist tones. Congressman, do you want to explain the letters, and second how would you be able to heal the racist divide, if according to a recent poll 41% of Americans find your newsletters disturbing?

Paul: Well Lester, I already apologized for the whole trouble this caused and already explained, but I can explain it again, I didn't write the newsletters, what I did was sign them because I didn't seem the racist comments in them when I signed them, and this was a big mistake, I didn't notice the comments and I ended up letting the newsletters pass, I already apologized for this and I will again, I'm sorry for any inconvenience this caused.

Now, on the second question you made... There are two things, the first one is that there are people that simply won't stop being racist, no matter what we do, the second thing is that the government won't be able to solve this problem, the government is not a good way to solve problems, there are better ways to solve them than asking the government, what I can do as president is to take actions that will help racism to get weaker, like for example pushing for a reform in the prison system and letting the states take their own actions to end racism.

HOLT: Senator Warren and Senator Rubio, two minutes to you both on the issue of healing the racial divide.
We need to demilitarize the police, pass a new voting rights act, and pass an amendment requiring a minimum percentage of officeholders in Federal and State Government be minorities.

Rubio: Well first of all, even though Congressman Paul keeps denying any responsibility in these newsletters, he has a record of bad judgement. Even if these newsletters are containing racist statements, he still let them pass. Congressman, when you were asked to let them pass, your answer should have been no.

And worse, while he was running for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, Congressman Paul has, in a desperate attempt to gain traction in the Republican primary, accepted 500 $ of campaign donations received from the neo-Nazi leader Don Black, who was a Great Wizard in the Ku Klux Klan and who runs a white supremacist websites like Stormfront that administered the website martinlutherking.org that was created to malign the character of Martin Luther King. He even refused to return this money to such extremist groups. So Congressman Paul did not have the courage to stand up to hate-mongers like Don Black. While the Paul campaign said that one of the reasons why this money was accepted is to try to spread the message of freedom, he can't have it both ways since this money is from extremist white supremacists movements that are acting against the rights of African Americans and all other ethnic and religious minorities. These groups are against liberty. Paul's decision to keep this money was putting his campaign ahead of the fight against hate. No wonder that Congressman Paul has voted time and time again against a holiday for Martin Luther King. No wonder that he has expressed disregard for Ronald Reagan, for Martin Luther King and for the entire African American community when President Reagan signed the Martin Luther King Jr. Day into law, after which Congressman Paul said, I quote, « What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day. »

Congressman, you should be ashamed of yourself. I think you owe apologies for the African-American community and to Senator Sanders. Even though we are opponents, even though we disagree on a lot of issues, I think Senator Sanders deserves apologies from Congressman Paul since Senator Sanders has attended the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, where Dr. King gave his « I Have a Dream » speech and since he was arrested by the Chicago police for participating and leading civil rights protests, including a demonstration against segregation in Chicago's public schools. America deserves better than hate, rage intolerance and xenophobia.

But let's come to your question, Lester. I am proud to have supported Governor Haley's efforts to remove the Confederate flag from South Carolina's Capitol Hill. The Second Amendment is not an option. It is not a suggestion. It is a constitutional right of every American to be able to protect themselves and their families. There are no gun control measures that would have been preventive. Why? Because criminals don't buy their guns from a gun show. They don't buy their guns from a collector. And they don't buy their guns from a gun store. They steal them. They get them on the black market. But I demonstrated clear leadership in stopping suspected criminals or terrorists from getting weapons by successfully introducing the Terror Intelligence Improvement Act that is aimed at keeping guns away from suspected terrorists. The right thing to do is to allow the Attorney General to delay transfer of firearms to suspected terrorists. That's how we're going to stop terrorists from orchestrating massive shootings while protecting the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

When it comes to race, the African American community's living conditions got worse, even under this president. Many members of this community were unfairly killed by policemen or supremacists. As I said, if you are white in America, you cannot fully understand what it means to be black in America. And the economic sluggish we are actually living has deepen racial inequalities. We need a reformed criminal code, which criminal regulations and laws are easier to understand, a reform of civil forfeiture by which people suspected of crimes will be deprived of private property. We need economic growth for all the American people, including African-Americans and we need to promote school choice to give African Americans an easier access to education. That's how we're going to give every American, including the African American community, a fair and decent chance to live the American Dream.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: Our next segment is called "Securing America." We want to start with a 21st century war happening every day in this country. Our institutions are under cyber attack, and our secrets are being stolen. So my question is, who's behind it? And how do we fight it?

HOLT: Senator Rubio this answer goes to you.:

Well, I think cyber security and cyber warfare will be one of the biggest challenges facing the next president, because clearly we're facing at this point two different kinds of adversaries. There are the independent hacking groups that do it mostly for commercial reasons to try to steal information that they can use to make money. But increasingly, we are seeing cyber attacks coming from states, organs of states. The most recent and troubling of these has been Russia. There's no doubt now that Russia has used cyber attacks against all kinds of organizations in our country, and I am deeply concerned about this. And I'm also concerned about the eventuality that Russia would be trying to hack this election in favor of a presidential candidate in particular, especially since, according to an article published on the website Daily Leak in 2014, documents stolen and released by Edward Snowden, a man for whom Congressman Paul led petition for his clemency, suggested that Congressman Paul gave secret government information to Vladimir Putin during his time in Congress, as well as at least one instance afterwards. These were apparently documents concerning Russia's imperialist policies and Crimea, a Ukrainian territory that Russia is now illegally occupying. No wonder that Congressman Paul supports this occupation that violated Ukraine's territorial integrity in addition of supporting the fact that Syria is led by a puppet of Putin like Bachar el-Assad who will only bring further terrorist threat in Syria through his oppressive and deadly policies that will push more people to radicalize themselves and to join terrorist groups. No wonder that Congressman Paul wants to tear up NATO and opposes its expansion. I believe that reinforcing our alliances and standing with our allies will help us to maintain international peace, security and freedom, make America and the whole world stronger through solidarity and collaboration and help us to defeat global terrorism. United we stand. Divided we fall. That is not for Vladimir Putin to decide who should occupy the presidency of the United States. Only the American people democratically decides who should lead this country. But we have investigate on whether it's Russia, China, Iran or anybody else who is leading these cyber-attacks.

And in the last few years, even ISIS is leading cyber-attacks against our country and our allies. Last December, ISIS hackers have tried to penetrate computers that regulate the nation’s electricity grid. And according to Politico, these ISIS hackers also discussed about a plan to crash passenger jets by hacking into on-board electronics and debated on triggering a lethal nuclear attack against the United States by sending rogue commands to nuclear power plants. That's why we have to reinforce our cyber-security. It does involve going after ISIS and other radical Islamic terrorists online. We need to do much more with our tech companies to prevent ISIS and their operatives from being able to use the Internet to radicalize, even direct people in our country and Europe and elsewhere. But we also have to intensify our airstrikes against ISIS, to deploy all the necessary military arsenal to defeat ISIS on its territory, to reinforce and expand our alliances and to secure ISIS' oil refineries and give them back to Syria and Iraq in order to stop ISIS from using them to get capitals they are using to finance and organize their terrorist activities. We also need to support our Arab, Kurdish and Peshmerga partners through military training and provision of military equipment, to establish background checks on Syrian rebels before arming them in order to make sure only anti-terrorist forces will be provided in weapons. That's how we're going to defeat ISIS in every single area, whether it's on land, from the air and online.


HOLT: Senator Sanders, your response,

Put simply, the optics on something like this are wrong. Yes, we need to upgrade our cybersecurity systems to reflect the 21st century; they are woefully out of date.

However, we should welcome transparency in our government. Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning and other people like them have done this country a great service by revealing just what our military and government have been doing, and this is something that Dr Paul and I agree on.

Furthermore, if we're so worried about our secrets being stolen, then we need to ask oursevles: What secrets is our government hiding?

We already know what Senator Warren and the Democratic National Committee were trying to hide, and the reveal of this information was a public service. I support Snowden coming home and Manning being freed from prison with no strings attached. They did a public service, and we should be celebrating whistleblowers, rather than persecuting them.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: Senator Warren:
A foreign government, likely Russia is responsible for the hacking attacks on the Democratic National Committee, and many other cyber attacks. We need to do everything possible to combat this, including launching our own retaliatory cyber attacks, and supporting efforts to remove Russia's veto powers at the United Nations Security Council.


HOLT: Congressman Paul:


Paul: There are many people behind it, and sometimes we can't even be sure, sometimes it could be North Korea, sometimes China, sometimes Russia... Or even other countries or independent groups... To me, we should do two things to prevent this type of thing, the first one is to hire good hackers and programers to defend our secrets and prevent new attacks and we should meet with the leaders of the suspected countries and negotiate deals to make our relation with them better and to make it sure that they won't continue with the Cyber attacks.


HOLT: Which leads to my next question, as we enter our last segment here (inaudible) the subject of securing America. On nuclear weapons, President Obama reportedly considered changing the nation's longstanding policy on first use. Do you support the current policy? Congressman Paul, you have two minutes on that.

Paul: I support a no first use policy for our nuclear weapons, I think WMDs are very dangerous, specially nuclear weapons and they should not be used unless someone uses against us first, with a no first use policy countries will still know that if they use their nukes, our nukes will also be used, so I don't think much will change, at least not in the matter of some country attacking us, nobody is that crazy, but in the unrealistic case of a war, I think it could maybe precent a nuclear war.


HOLT: Senator Rubio, your response.
We are living difficult times in which our enemies could have the ability to destroy the world and to trigger nuclear wars that would cost millions and millions of lives.

Iran is closer from getting nuclear weapons than it was ever before. President Obama made things worse by approving the Iran nuclear deal that lifted sanctions against Iran and handed over 100 billion dollars to the world's biggest sponsor of global terrorism. They are using this money to fund terrorist groups around the world in addition of providing weapons to them, thus ensuring further terrorist attacks. They are also using this money to keep building nuclear weapons that will be used to destroy Israel and to attack the United States and all our other allies. Such a scenario in which Iran annihilates Israel will create a vacuum on Israeli territory, a vacuum that will give terrorist groups like ISIS, Hezbollah or Sinai Province (the Egyptian branch of ISIS) a big opportunity to take control of Israel's territory, to make it a terrorist haven they could use as a springboard to prepare and commit terrorist attacks in the Middle East, in Europe, in Africa and in the United States. And yet, Senator Warren, Senator Sanders and Congressman Paul are all supporting this deal. When I'm President of the United States, we will this anti-American deal and nations will have to choose between doing business with either Iran or America and I am convinced they're going to choose America before they choose the Iranian economy. By reinforcing sanctions against Iran, we will make sure that they will never have the necessary capitals to develop nuclear weapons and to sponsor global terrorism. By establishing an anti-missile shield in the Mediterranean Sea, we're going to intercept and destroy any nuclear missile launched by Iran against us and our allies. And by reinforcing our defense ties with our allies in the Middle East and in the Indian Subcontinent (especially Turkey, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India), we will not only fight and defeat terrorism in the Middle East but also increase pression on Iran to make certain that Tehran will never ever get nuclear weapons. We have to make sure that Iran will use its nuclear energy not for military purposes but for economic purposes. Nuclear energy should be used for Iran's economic growth. The military option should not be taken off the table, but as long as Iran will act the way I just described, there will be no need to intervene militarily against Iran, which will reinforce international security and peace.

In regards to Pakistan, the issue of military nuclear is a reason why they should do more to work with us to defeat radical Islamic terrorism instead of sponsoring terrorism because terrorists could steal Pakistani nuclear weapons and use them to launch terrorist attacks against the United States and their allies.

And finally, when it comes to North Korea, the Obama administration has failed to take affirmative action against the North Korean threat. They are about to get missiles that will be able to hit Hawaii, Alaska and the Western Coast. Early this year, I have demonstrated real leadership by co-sponsoring the North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act of 2016 that increased sanctions on international firms, especially Chinese firms, that are transferring dollars to the regime of Kim Jong-un, a lunatic leader who will use this money to fund the development of nuclear weapons that will be aimed at attacking the United States and our allies and to trigger an arms race in the Asia-Pacific region or worse a nuclear war. My plan to defeat the North Korean threat has seven parts :

Number one, putting North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terror. They should never have been removed from that list since they supported terrorist activities such as the 1987 bombing of Korean Air flight 858, gave asylum to Japanese Communist League-Red Army Faction members, orchestrated the Rangoon bombing in 1983, which was an assassination attempt against former South Korean President Chun Doo-hwan, and are now developing nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction to attack us and our allies. But they can be put back on that list and that's what I will do as President of the United States.

Number two, additional sanctions especially on North Korea's leadership who holds significant assets overseas. They need to be punished individually because while that country has no economy, their leaders are very wealthy and are putting their nuclear arsenal ahead of the needs of the North Korean people, using most of their money to reinforce their oppressive regime and to empower their nuclear program.

Number three, as provided in my co-sponsored North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act of 2016 that was signed into law last January, we have to impose sanctions on any individual, company or bank around the world that serve as financial intermediaries for dollar transactions to North Korea to help this tyrannical and corrupt regime to evade U.N. sanctions and to fund the development of North Korean nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.

Number four, making sure that China will do more to increase pressure on North Korea and stop the North Korean threat because North Korea's nuclear missiles are so powerful that they can cause explosions that could extend on a very large zone, like the whole city of New York, and if North Korea launches a nuclear attack on Seoul, for example, it would be bad for China's economic activities in the Yellow Sea, especially fishing since several of local aquatic resources would also be destroyed by nuclear radiations. In addition, if South Korea is bombarded and annihilated by North Korean nuclear weapons, China would lose its second main import partner that is none other than South Korea because South Korea imports 10 % of exported Chinese products in the world. And the less importers China will have, the less they can boost their economy. So, for China, giving more efforts against the North Korean threat would save its economic interests in addition of ensuring national security all around the Pacific Ocean. That's why China has to join us to increase diplomatic pression on North Korea

Number five, cutting off North Korea's crude oil supply. No modern military can function without oil; it is the very lifeblood of any armed force.

Number six, we need to rebuild our military alliances in the Asia-Pacific region. And that includes Japan, South Korea and others. That's why, in order to maintain peace and security on the Pacific, I proposed the creation of a NATO-like military association that I call Pacific Treaty Organization (PTO), but that would include the United States and its allies around the Pacific, especially Canada, Japan, South Korea and Australia. It goes back to the point I made about our navy. Our navy is technologically very capable, but our ships still cannot be in two places at once. So you can't provide the level of security we need in the Asia-Pacific region with the smallest navy in a hundred years, not to mention the issues we have with China in the South China Sea. So rebuilding our military, especially our navy, and reinforcing our navy's presence in the Asia-Pacific region in particular is critically important.

And number seven, we need to recommit to missile defense. North Korea already possesses intercontinental missiles capable of reaching Hawaii, Guam and maybe even Alaska as well as the West Coast of the United States. We need a comprehensive missile defense system for the entire continental United States, both West Coast ad East Coast, as well as for Alaska and Hawaii in order to guard against the Iranian threat and also to guard against the North Korean threat. And that's a multi-faceted defense system. It involves naval assets near and theater and includes working with the Japanese that have a very capable navy it also includes missile defense units deployed both on the East Coast and West Coast because if trends continue, this lunatic and tyrannical leader in North Korea will possess a missile and a warhead capable of reaching the United States and we better be able to shoot it down before it gets anywhere near us and we need to invest and recommit to that again for the sake of America's security and international peace and stability.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: Senator Warren:
I don't believe that our policy on Nuclear Weapons needs significant tweaking. The President should be the only person with the only person with the authority to order a nuclear strike.

HOLT: And to you Senator Sanders:

This is one area where the President has my full support. We are living in an age where the press of a button can wipe out entire nations in the blink of an eye. Nuclear weapons are the deadliest things this world has ever seen. Disregarding the obvious effect such as radiation, there is also the electromagnetic pulse that a nuclear warhead emits, which disables all modern electronics within a certain radius.

Not only do I support no-first use, but as President, I will reach out to other nuclear powers with the goal of a 50% reduction in nuclear arms by the end of my second term.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

HOLT: My last question for the night. This is a divided country, as evident by the field of candidates. Polling shows a tight race, and the winner will likely garner a plurality of the vote. My question is this: if you are elected, how will you be able to heal the divisions in our country?

Paul: Well I want to make it clear to everyone, I don't care if you're white, asian, hispanic, black, liberal, conservative or anything else, I think we all are Americans, and I think we all need to wish the best for our country, and regardless of who wins the election, in my opinion the way to do this is to be a president to everyone, not for your race, not for your party, but for all Americans.

Sanders: We need more investment in public education, a nationwide infrastructure and jobs program, we need to raise the minimum wage,and we need to start making the wealthy in this country pay their fair share. These are ideals I have stood up for all my life, and I swear to you, if I win this election, I will bring my platform of social and economic justice to Washington DC.

[NHI]

Presidential Debate

Rubio: Like you said, Lester, there is no doubt about the fact that our country is divided since too long. I am the only one presidential candidate on this stage who demonstrated his ability to find common grounds in order to bring all the American people together and to get things done for the sake of a bright future for America. I intend to represent all the people, not just some people. That includes African Americans, white Americans, Hispanics (the community I am from), Asian Americans, Christians, Muslims, Jews, poor people, low income Americans and the middle class.

If I'm President of the United States, I will get our country to energy independence without hurting the environment by increasing oil drilling, using a part of revenues from oil drilling to invest into the development of renewable energies. That's how we can ensure a clean environment without making America a harder place to do business.

Instead of ending an unborn child's life before it even begins, I believe we should promote adoptions instead of abortion in order to allow these unborn children to live, to be loved and to appreciate life. It will also allow couples who don't want a children not to have one without having to end these children's lives.

Instead of violating the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, we can prevent massive supremacist or terrorist shootings by allowing the Attorney General to block the transfer of weapons to suspected criminals or suspected terrorists. That way, we can protect our constitutional rights while saving lives. That's exactly what I'm proposing.

We all know, no matter our party affiliation, that everyone should have access to education, which means reducing the cost of getting education. That's why I want to promote school choice which will cost families, including these immigrant families living paycheck to paycheck, less and produce higher outcomes compared to public education. It will grant parents the power to orientate their children out of poorly-performing schools assigned by zip code and look for better education elsewhere. It will expand opportunities for low-income students—especially minorities—to attend high-quality schools that would otherwise be accessible only to higher-income families, thus increasing their chances of success and of entry into the workforce.

I am proud to be presidential nominee of the political party that freed African Americans from slavery under Abraham Lincoln's presidency and that made the Martin Luther King Jr. Day a holiday under President Ronald Reagan who signed the Martin Luther King Jr. Day in 1983. I supported the campaign to remove the Confederate flag from South Carolina's Capitol Hill. Even under Barack Obama, the African American community's living conditions got worse than they were eight years ago. Racist murders increased and tax increases imposed by this administration put many African Americans into poverty, costing their jobs and their purchasing power. Thanks to tax cuts for all the American people, including the African American community, we're going to improve their living conditions and reinforce their purchasing power. That way, they will be able to overcome their struggles and to achieve success in this society. As President of the United States, I will reform our criminal code, which criminal regulations and laws are easier to understand, as well as our civil forfeiture by which people suspected of crimes will be deprived of private property. And thanks to my guns rights plan, we will fight more effectively and prevent racist murders.

We are an open nation and diversity is one of our nation's strengths. I understand that immigrants are contributors to America's greatness by bringing diversity, thus giving us the opportunity to create jobs. I want our immigration system to be resolved, but there are still steps to accomplish before getting there due to a decreased national security here and abroad. The American people has been told for three decades that our borders are going to be reinforced and secured, but nothing ever happened since then. The American people is still waiting for results. All immigrants living all across this country are still waiting results. If I'm President, we're going enforce our immigration laws. I am the son and grandson of immigrants. And I know that securing our borders is not anti-immigrant. We're going to reinforce and secure our borders in order to keep ISIS out of America and to prevent terrorist attacks on our territory. We will hire 20,000 new border agents instead of 20,000 new IRS agents. We will finish the 700 miles of fencing and walls our nation needs. We'll have mandatory E-verify, a mandatory entry/exit tracking system. Until all of that is in place, we can prove our people that illegal immigration is under control. I will make it a priority for the first year of my first term because the sooner we bring illegal immigration under control, the sooner we can reform our broken immigration system to ensure a path to citizenship for immigrants, which will help them to live better lives and to finally accomplish the American Dream here on the land of opportunity.

As a member of the Hispanic community, I understand the struggles of this community. The Obama Administration has been ineffective when it comes to ensure permanent job creation for the American people, including Hispanics. This summer, the unemployment rate among Hispanics raised from 5.4 % in July to 6.4 % today. This is due to the sluggish economy we're living today and to Obama's big government policies such as higher taxes and regulations on all the American people, including the middle class, which put tens of millions of Americans out of work, made America a harder place to do business, undermined free enterprise, diminished our people's access to education and put the American Dream in decline. The main issue for Americans of Hispanic descent is economic empowerment. My parents worked every single day to work to give me and my siblings opportunities that they didn't have. There's only one economic system in the world that that's possible in time and again and that's the American free enterprise system while Senator Warren wants to dismantle free enterprise. That's why we have to reduce taxes and regulations on all the people, including Hispanics in order to reward their hard work, to allow them to live the American Dream and find a good-paying job and to help them to take care of their families. We need to give Hispanics the opportunity to learn English while maintaining their language and cultural heritage in order to open up economic opportunities for them, because I believe we should not close these opportunities for any of our fellow citizens because their first language is another one than English. School choice will improve their access to education and make their path to a good-paying job much easier. By promoting free trade with Latin America, we will give our businesses, including Hispanic small businesses in the United States thanks to language opportunities and their fluency in Spanish and English, new opportunities to innovate, to increase their competitiveness, to get new consumers by giving them access to American products, to create jobs in our country and ensure their business' expansion. Thanks to their bilingualism, Hispanics will be dominant among the importers, exporters, translators and executives who ensure such a cultural and commercial exchange. And like I said, our innovation and competition capacity comes from our open markets as well as our constant quest for new markets.

And finally, on trade, as I said earlier, I have plan that promotes real solutions to job losses. The right solution is not to rip our trade deals like Senator Warren, Senator Sanders and Congressman Paul are suggesting. The solution is to make America the best business-friendly climate in the world. We're going to bring our jobs back home by reducing taxes and regulations on our manufacturing industry so we can keep our manufacturing jobs here in America while creating a lot more jobs in this sector. We will also make our trade deals fairer for American workers by cutting our corporate tax rate to 20 % so our businesses as well as our entire country will be much more competitive in the world economy. That's how we're going to promote fairer trade deals for America while making it the most competitive country in the global economy through lower tariffs and lower costs of trading, which will get us new consumers around the world and give them a better access to American products, thus ensuring stronger job creation here in America.

That's why I'm running to be President for all Americans whether they are conservatives, liberals, independents or libertarians and I will be a bipartisan leader who will get things by bringing all the American people together. You know why? Because we are the United States of America, the hope of the Earth and the shining city on the hill. Thank you.

Warren: I don't believe any one candidate will be able to truly heal the divisions in this country, that they will always be there. But if the next President can be a leader for all Americans, he or she has a chance to erase many of those divides.


HOLT: That concludes tonight's Presidential debate...

[NHI]

Reaction to Presidential Debate:

Social Media Reaction

#Debate Conversations

Rubio: 26%
Paul: 29%
Warren: 22%
Sanders: 24%

Instant Polls: Who Won the 1st Presidential Debate?

Paul: 23%

Rubio: 25%

Sanders: 20%

Warren: 19%
Undecided: 11%
None of the Above: 3%

Debate Take Aways:

Pos: Articulate, Prepared, specific, visionary
Neg: Repetitive, wordy

Pos: Unfazed, succinct, unapologetic
Neg: Uninspired, brief

Pos: Passionate, Clear, Contrasting
Neg: Controversial, extreme

Pos: Specific, contrasting, passionate
Neg: Extreme, Controversial

Polling: Post Debate

Rubio: 40% (-2)

Warren: 38% (-2)

Sanders: 7% (-0)

Paul: 6% (+2)

This Round will Last: September 27 - October 4, 2016

Game Round ending: Sunday (10/8/17) at 10:00 PM EST

[NHI]

Addendum:
HOLT: Congressman Paul, your turn, you are still a Republican, yet your campaign is based on challenging Senator Rubio over a 'lack of Republican and constitutional values' explain what you mean by that sir?
[Congressman Paul's response]

Marco Rubio's response to Congressman Paul's debate statement :
Well Lester, if I may respond to it, I'm proud to be a conservative Republican and to be a champion of America's values that are defended by the Constitution of the United States. On guns, for instance, I'm the only candidate on this stage who was able to find common grounds. In order to prevent massive shootings in the United States, I propose that we allow the Attorney General to block the transfer of firearms to suspected criminals and suspected terrorists because that's the right way to reinforce security without violating the Second Amendment.

As President, I will, like I always did, I will fight wasteful spending. I will cut taxes for all the American people, from the bottom to the top, I will abolish the IRS and replace it by a 15 % flat tax. I will reduce government spending and promote free market solutions to our problems. I will oppose all government intervention and regulation on wages, prices, rents, profits, production and interest rates and advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products or services. I believe that free markets will stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect the environment and ecosystem. I will put in place a balanced budget amendment and will make America the best place in the world to do business.

Actually, Congressman Paul is the one who lacks Republican values. Here are a lot of examples of this matter of fact. Congressman Paul doesn't seem to understand the economy, especially when it comes to trade. We are a nation whose economic strength is based on free enterprise. Congressman Paul claims that our free trade deals only favors corporations. He got it wrong, because corporations, along with businesses, create jobs for the American people. So Congressman, don't make another Hillary Clinton out of yourself after she said that it's not corporations and businesses that create jobs, which was an offense against free enterprise, against success and against the American Dream. Congressman Paul claims to be a champion of free trade, and yet he is adopting an agenda similar to Senator Warren and Senator Sanders by voting YES on withdrawing from the WTO and by opposing free trade, especially NAFTA, free trade agreement with Chile, US-Singapore free trade agreement, US-Australia Free Trade Agreement, CAFTA and  free trade with Peru. Opposing free trade means higher tariffs and higher tariffs means bigger government and more government intrusion in the economy. It also undermines our consumers' purchasing power, thus weakening consumption and consumption is an important element of economic growth. It also restricts great opportunities create American jobs by trading with 95 % of the whole world while we represent only 5 % of the world's population. So Congressman Paul wants to restrict trade and to impose higher tariffs. And the last president of the United States that tried that was Herbert Hoover, and we went from a deep recession into a depression. The Great Depression got longer and worse because of the legislation of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 that increased tariffs and reduced American exports and imports, thus increasing unemployment rate from 8 % in 1930 to 25 % in 1932. We're not going to follow that path when I'm President of the United States. The right way to promote free trade, to protect our workers and make our trade deals fairer for America is to make our country the best business-friendly environment and to cut taxes for our manufacturing industry, which will bring American manufacturing jobs back home and make our manufacturing businesses more competitive and more dynamic, thus increasing their ability to innovate, to grow and to create further manufacturing jobs here in the United States. There is one thing my opponents don't understand, one of the reasons why our Asian trade partners are beating us in trade deals like the Transpacific Partnership is that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the developped world, which is 40 %, while Singapore has the lowest corporate tax rate in the same area at only 17 %. That's why we have to reduce our corporate tax rate from 40 % to 20 %, which will reinforce our status as the best place to start a business, bring jobs back to this country, increase our businesses' ability to produce, to sell and to create jobs and will make our trade deals more advantageous for America. The bottom line is, we need to put the government aside and to encourage tax reform in order to encourage America's quest for open markets because our prosperity comes mostly from globalization.

During his political career, Congressman Paul has proven to be one of the pork-barrel earmarkers on Capitol Hill.  He even said during an interview with Neil Cavuto that we should earmark even more. In this same interview, he said that he never voted for an earmark nor he ever voted for an appropriations bill. But that is exactly the point. His strategy was to stuff legislation with earmarks that benefit his constituents and thus his re-election, and then vote against the overall bill so he can claim to have opposed all the spending in the first place. By the way, Reason, a libertarian magazine, points out that Congressman Paul voted against a $410 billion omnibus spending bill that passed over his objections. But this same magazine notes that Congressman Paul played a role in obtaining 22 earmarks worth $96.1 million, which led the Houston congressional delegation, according to a Houston Chronicle analysis of more than 8,500 congressionally mandated projects inserted into the bill. So he got to have it both ways : he could claim to have voted against a $410 billion taxpayer boondoggle, while simultaneously vacuuming up tens of millions in taxpayer dollars for his congressional district. That is something a big-government politician would do.

When it comes to energy, Congressman Paul Congressman Paul has not always acted in favor of America's energy independence. In 2003 and 2004, alongside Senator Sanders, he voted against the passage of the Energy Omnibus Bill that allowed oil drilling in ANWR to expand domestic energy sources, that allowed tax breaks for energy production and conservation, allowed the construction of a natural gas pipeline from the Alaskan North Slope to the continental 48 states and allowed for research and exploration of new energy and heating sources, which boosted the U.S. economy. When I'm President, America will be the world's energy superpower thanks to energy independence. I will accomplish this engagement by ending the War on Coal, cutting taxes and regulations on the coal industry, which will bring coal mining jobs back in this country, encourage job creation, help us developing technologies that will produce clean coal, produce more electricity and give our consumers more access to heat. I will cut taxes and regulations on the oil industry, encourage oil drilling and production and approve the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, of the Dakota Access pipeline and of the TransAmerica pipeline (that would be set from Pennsylvania to California), which will not only create jobs but also get us revenues, which a part will be used for the development of renewable energies instead of taxpayers' money. That way, we can keep encouraging job creation trough taking advantage of all of our sources of energy while improving our ecological footprint.

And finally, in regards to terrorism, the true threat to liberty and to our people's constitutional rights is global terrorism. So thanks to reinforced and modernized security measures, we will prevent further terrorist attacks like the one that wounded 34 people here in New York and in New Jersey as well as the one in Orlando, San Bernardino and Garland. That's how we're going to save American lives. Because one of the main reasons why the terrorist attack in San Bernardino occurred on December 4 2015 is because some Senators, including your son Rand Paul, alongside Senator Warren and Senator Sanders, voted in favor of weakening our surveillance program on June 2 2015, which is six months before these attacks, thus putting our country in danger and encouraging terrorists to commit terrorist attacks on our soil and to kill Americans, which allowed two radical Islamic terrorists to kill 14 people and to injure 22 others in San Bernardino because we did not have access to records, information and other items under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that would have allowed us to identify these killers before they attacked. So reinforcing our security measures is necessary, for example, because parts of the FBI couldn't talk to each other. Intelligence gathering and the law enforcement arms of the FBI just couldn't share intelligence under the old law, and that didn't make any sense. Our law enforcement must have every tool necessary to find and disrupt terrorists at home and abroad before they hurt us again. That's the task of the 21st century.

The reason why we managed to find and kill Osama Bin Laden is because we launched the War on Terror and because we reinforced our security measures as well as our military and our counter-terrorism operations. Meanwhile, just like Senator Warren and Senator Sanders, Congressman Paul wants to deprive us of all the tools we need to defeat radical Islamic terrorism by reducing our military at its lowest size since World War I and restricting our security measures in addition of wanting to tear up our alliances. We need to reinforce and modernize our military and to strengthen our alliances, to strike terrorists on their turf and to arm the right groups in the Middle East through background checks on them. Radical Islamic terrorists are killing Americans for defending the values in which we believe in, especially gender equity, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press and democracy. Even though neither Senator Warren nor Senator Sanders won't even call the enemy by its name, radical Islamic terrorism is evil and is the ideology of tyranny and barbarism and must be defeated in order to defend our liberty, our freedom, our democracy, our values and our Constitution. As a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and of the U.S. Senate Committee on Intelligence, I have the right experience, knowledge, leadership and judgement to defeat global terrorism. That experience will help me to make sure we will obtain unconditional and total victory against terrorists.
[/quote]

[Jaguar4life]

(When will the questions for the VP debate come?)

[NHI]

(When will the questions for the VP debate come?)

Will have them for you tomorrow.

[NewYorkExpress]

(When will the questions for the VP debate come?)

Will have them for you tomorrow.

Wasn't the VP debate on October 4?

NHI's the game manager, he's most certainly allowed to change the dates of the debates (not that I like it)

[UWS]

(When will the questions for the VP debate come?)

Will have them for you tomorrow.

Wasn't the VP debate on October 4?

NHI's the game manager, he's most certainly allowed to change the dates of the debates (not that I like it)

So that means that the VP debate would be set on October 3 instead of October 4 like in real life?

[NHI]

(When will the questions for the VP debate come?)

Will have them for you tomorrow.

Wasn't the VP debate on October 4?

NHI's the game manager, he's most certainly allowed to change the dates of the debates (not that I like it)

So that means that the VP debate would be set on October 3 instead of October 4 like in real life?

This was a mistake on my part. The round is supposed to last until October 4 -- (same date as the RL Debate).

Questions are going out now.

[Jaguar4life]

(I am gonna need a extension)

[UWS]

Rubio/Pearcy 2016
A New American Century

Schedule September 27-October 4 2016, Part 1

September 27
-Flight to Davenport, Iowa
-Meet with voters in Davenport, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Fundraising event in Davenport, Iowa to celebrate Marco Rubio's debate victory in the first presidential debate
-Agriculture policy speech in Davenport, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Economic policy speech in Davenport, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Meet with voters in Bettendorf, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Manufacturing policy speech in Bettendorf, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Rally with voters at the Wuad Cities Waterfront Center in Bettendorf, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Meet with voters in Muscatine, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Foreign policy speech in Muscatine, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Freedom of religion policy speech in Muscatine, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Meet with voters in Wilton, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Small government policy speech in Wilton, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Counter-terrorism policy speech in Wilton, Iowa with Stephen Pearcy and Joni Ernst
-Flight to Port Huron, Michigan
-Meet with voters in Port Huron, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Economic policy speech in Port Huron, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Marysville, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Manufacturing policy speech at Intertape Polymer factory in Marysville, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Energy policy speech at Intertape Polymer factory in Marysville, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Lapeer, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Infrastructure policy speech in Lapeer, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Trade policy speech in Lapeer, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Brown City, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Imlay City, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Tax policy speech in Imlay City, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Mount Clemens, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Free enterprise policy speech in Mount Clemens, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Warren, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Rally with a huge crowd of undecided voters in Warren, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan :

I guess you watched the first presidential debate. So I guess you watched Congressman Paul talking to me about free trade. Every single thing he has said about my trade agenda is a lie. He claimed that I waited until the actual general election campaign to propose a new version of the TPP. This is just another lie. He claims that it only favors corporations. Once again he got it wrong because corporations and businesses create jobs for the American people, not the government. He doesn't seem to know anything about the economy, especially when it comes to trade.

Since the very beginning of this presidential campaign, including during the Republican primaries, I proposed to make a new version of the TPP and to make our trade deals fairer for American workers by making America the best place in the world to do business, by cutting taxes and regulations for businesses across this country, including for our manufacturing industry, which will not only bring massive job creation here in America but also bring our jobs, including our manufacturing jobs, back home. What you don't seem to understand is that one of the reasons why Mexico is beating us, especially on auto manufacturing, is that Mexico has free trade agreements with 45 countries while the U.S. has free trade deals with just 20. Exporting to most of the world is easier there than here. The reason why Asian countries are surpassing us in trade is because they have among the lowest corporate tax rates, including 17 % for Singapore. That's why I proposed, even during the primaries, to cut our corporate tax rate to 20 % in order to make our country the best business-friendly environment in the world. That's why I won the primaries in Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania with over 60 % of the vote in every of these states. That's why I'm endorsed by populist people like Donald Trump, Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan because my trade agenda will allow our country to find common grounds by making our free trade deals fairer through tax reform, which will allow us to pursue our quest for open markets and to ensure job creation in America through expanded trade relations, lower tariffs and lower costs to buy American products. Because claiming, like you did, that I voted in favor of big globalist government is not only a lie but also a calumny because lower tariffs means less government and less government intrusion in the economy.  It also boosts consumers' purchasing power, thus reinforcing consumption, an important element of economic growth, which is exactly the contrast of Congressman Paul's agenda. He does not have the courage to find real conservative free market solutions to our problems related to trade.

Let me remind you this Congressman : the last president who tried to restrict trade was Herbert Hoover, and we went from a deep recession to a depression. The Great Depression got longer and worse. Why? Because of the legislation of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 that increased tariffs and reduced American exports and imports, thus increasing unemployment rate from 8 % in 1930 to 25 % in 1932. That's the last thing we need.

And let me tell you this, the American people is sick and tired of hearing talking about the establishment thing. They want a President who will unite all the people of the United States of America together. When I ran for the Senate, I fought and defeated the establishment, I stood up to special interests, I propose that we arm the right groups in the Middle East through background checks to make sure we'll not arm terrorists, I proposed reduction of our corporate tax rate and tax cuts for our manufacturing industry in order to bring American jobs here in America. These are things the establishment has never suggested in the past. That's why I'm the only candidate in this presidential race who has proven to be able to bring all the conservative movement and all the American people together, that's why I'm endorsed by Ted Cruz, Jeff Sessions, Mike Huckabee, Donald Trump and Stephen Pearcy and that's why I selected him as my running mate. Because I want a united America. Meanwhile, Congressman Paul wants to divide the conservative movement, which could lead to Elizabeth Warren's victory and give us four more years of big government, of Obamacare, job losses, higher taxes and regulations, bigger government spending, War on Coal, dependence on foreign energy. No wonder that Congressman Paul did not spend a single moment during the debate to attack Warren. I was his only target. If Warren is elected, our children will be the first generation of Americans to inherit a country in decline. If I'm elected, I will reduce government spending, cut taxes and regulations for all the people, end the War on Coal and lead us to energy independence by taking advantage of our own sources of energy, balance the budget, put in place a balanced budget amendment and repeal and replace Obamacare. That requires that all the conservative movement unites towards my campaign, which will lead us to victory in November and to a New American Century.

Thank you God bless the United States of America.

[Crowd cheers, applauds and chants USA! USA! USA!]

-Meet with voters in Farmington Hills, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Manufacturing policy speech ahead of Hitachi Automotive Systems Americas Offices in Farmington Hills, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Shelby, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan
-Meet with voters in Detroit, Michigan with Ross Perot and Michael Reagan

[UWS]

Marco Rubio Campaign Ad

In an effort to hurt Ron Paul among fiscal conservatives and to unite all the entire conservative movement towards Marco Rubio's campaign, Rubio's presidential campaign broadcasts an ad attacking Congressman Paul by questionning his fiscal conservative credentials due to his ambiguous record on earmarks by obtaining 22 earmarks worth $96.1 million during his political career.

The ad titled « Ambiguity » airs in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin

« Ambiguity » advertisement narration :

Narrator : Congressman Paul claims to be the most conservative presidential candidate in this race. His claims are not accurate.


During his political career, Congressman Paul has proven to be one of the pork-barrel earmarkers on Capitol Hill.  He even said during an interview with Neil Cavuto that we should earmark even more. In this same interview, he said that he never voted for an earmark nor he ever voted for an appropriations bill. But that is exactly the point. His strategy was to stuff legislation with earmarks that benefit his constituents and thus his re-election, and then vote against the overall bill so he can claim to have opposed all the spending in the first place.


The libertarian magazine Reason points out that Congressman Paul voted against a $410 billion omnibus spending bill that passed over his objections. But this same magazine notes that Congressman Paul played a role in obtaining 22 earmarks worth $96.1 million, which led the Houston congressional delegation, according to a Houston Chronicle analysis of more than 8,500 congressionally mandated projects inserted into the bill. So he got to have it both ways : he could claim to have voted against a $410 billion taxpayer boondoggle, while simultaneously vacuuming up tens of millions in taxpayer dollars for his congressional district. That is something a big-government politician would do.


Unlike Congressman Paul, Marco Rubio will bring real conservative leadership in the White House. He's the only real fiscally responsible presidential candidate in this race. As President, he will fight wasteful government spending, put in place a balanced budget amendment, abolish the IRS and replace it with a 15 % flat-tax, repeal and replace Obamacare, cut taxes and regulations for all the people, promote free enterprise and free market, get America to energy independence by making sure we'll take advantage of our own energies (oil, gas, coal, wind, solar, nuclear, hydroelectricity, etc.) reform our education system through school choice and make America will keep its status as the best business-friendly environment in the world in order to encourage job creation.

Marco Rubio for a conservative leadership, for the restoration of America's economic prosperity and for a New American Century.

Marco Rubio : I'm Marco Rubio and I approve this message.

[GoTfan]

Sanders once again headed to New Hampshire, this time accompanied by Former Governor John Lynch, hoping to capitalise on any kingering popularity. He also made another visit to New York, where he visited impoverished neighborhoods in New York City with his running mate, Congresswoman Gabbard. He continued to hold major events in the industrial states as well, hoping to position himself as the populist candidate who wants to protect American manufacturing.

Gabbard headed largely to the District of Columbia, talking up Sanders' bill that would grant the District statehood, as well as offering a full referendum on the status of Puerto Rico, and whether they wished to become a state or go independent. She also talked up the need for the Washington DC government to have more autonomy over their district, and that too much control is exercised by Congress over the District.

[UWS]

Rubio/Pearcy 2016
A New American Century

Schedule September 27-October 4 2016, Part 2

September 28
-Flight to Richmond, Virginia
-Debate preparations on the plane
-Meet with voters in Richmond, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Foreign policy speech in Richmond, Virginia with Jim Webb :

Even though she's a Democrat, Hillary Clinton was right on one thing about Barack Obama. He wasn't ready to answer the phone at 3 am in the morning though Clinton has also failed to fulfill this responsibility as Secretary of State. Here are many examples of this. Under Barack Obama's presidency, the global radical Islamic terrorist threat has become stronger than ever before due to this administration's drastic cuts in defense and in the military, to a reduction of the size of our military and to our troops' withdrawal at the wrong time while the Iraqi troops were not fully trained. So we saw a rise of ISIS that conquered a massive territory and we saw several terrorist attacks around the world over the last eight years, including the one against our embassy in Benghazi in 2012 as well as ISIS attacks in Paris, Nice, Brussels and even on our territory when they killed Americans in Garland, San Bernardino and Orlando. Through his nuclear deal with Iran, President Obama is allowing Iran to get the necessary hundreds of billions of dollars from the lifting of the sanctions to keep sponsoring global terrorism and to build nuclear weapons that will trigger nuclear wars. And he even won't mention the words radical Islamic terrorism to describe our enemy. Senator Warren, who is running for Obama's third term, will bring more of the same failed and weak foreign policy. She's not ready to answer the phone call at 3 am in the morning. But I am, because time for action is now before terrorists strike again and kill more Americans and innocent people around the world. That requires stronger security measures, a stronger U.S. military, stronger alliances, giving priority to the track of terrorists, striking them on their turf and establishing background checks on rebel groups before arming them. If you elect me, we will restore American leadership and we're going to win this fight against radical Islamic terrorism.

[Crowd cheers and applauds]

-Meet with voters in Farmsville, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Counter-terrorism policy speech in Farmsville, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Meet with voters in Salem, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Coal policy speech in Salem, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Manufacturing policy speech in Salem, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Meet with voters in Charlottesville, Virginia with Jim Webb
-School choice policy speech in Charlottesville, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Immigration policy speech in Charlottesville, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Health care policy speech in Charlottesville, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Meet with voters in Alexandria, Virginia with Jim Webb
-National security policy speech in Alexandria, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Small government policy speech in Alexandria, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Tax policy speech in Alexandria, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Education policy speech in Alexandria, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Meet with voters in Norfolk, Virginia with Jim Webb
-Meet with voters in Virginia Beach, Virginia with Jim Webb

[UWS]

Marco Rubio Campaign Ad

In an effort to attract voters who selected the economy as the most important issue, Marco Rubio's presidential campaign broadcasts an ad attacking Elizabeth Warren on her big government agenda and reminding that even Democrat John F. Kennedy cut taxes and brought positive results on the U.S. economy, thus demonstrating that Rubio's economic plan is better than Warren's.

The ad titled « Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy » airs in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin

« Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy » advertisement narration :


Narrator : Who can be trusted to manage the economy? Not Elizabeth Warren. She seeks to pursue Barack Obama's failed big government policies that gave us the slowest economy in decades, increased taxes and regulations, made us much more dependent on foreign oil, diminished free enterprise, made America a harder place to do business, overshipped American jobs and businesses overseas. She doesn't understand how the economy works. She doesn't understand that it's businesses, free enterprise and free market that create jobs, not the government.


Senator Warren has forgotten that even President John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, cut taxes in order to encourage economic growth, which brought positive results for the economy. Thanks to Kennedy's tax cuts the economy accelerated and prospered, the GDP expanded by an average of 5.5% from early 1961 to late 1963, inflation was down at around 1 %, the unemployment rate declined from 6.6 % to 5.6 % during Kennedy's two years in the White House, industrial production rose by 15 % and motor vehicle sales rose by 40 %. No wonder that Senator Warren is no Jack Kennedy.


Marco Rubio during the first presidential debate : Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.


Narrator : Marco Rubio gets it. Unlike Senator Warren, he knows what it takes to make this economy working again. He will use his experience as member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship to do so.


Under his presidency, taxes, regulations will be reduced in order to ensure a stronger purchasing power for all the people, government spending will be cut, our corporate tax rate will be lowered from 40 % to 20 % in order to make our trade deals fairer and to bring a better business-friendly environment in America, the cost of doing business in our country will be lower, America will be energy independent by encouraging oil drilling and using a part of revenues of oil drilling to invest into the development of renewable energies and our education system will be reformed and fairer for all Americans through school choice.

Marco Rubio, the candidate with the experience, knowledge and background to restore America's prosperity.

Marco Rubio : I'm Marco Rubio and I approve this message.

[NHI]

Battleground Polling:

Ohio: Tossup
Rubio: 44%
Warren: 42%
Sanders: 7%
Paul: 2%

Pennsylvania: Lean Rubio
Rubio: 46%
Warren: 43%
Sanders: 5%
Paul: 1%

New Hampshire: Tossup
Rubio: 30%
Warren: 27%
Sanders: 22%
Paul: 14%

Virginia: Tossup
Rubio: 48%
Warren: 46%
Sanders: 1%
Paul: <1%

Wisconsin: Lean Rubio
Rubio: 44%
Warren: 40%
Sanders: 9%
Paul: 2%

Iowa: Lean Rubio
Rubio: 40%
Warren: 36%
Sanders:11%
Paul: 3%

Michigan: Lean Rubio
Rubio: 44%
Warren: 40%
Sanders: 10%
Paul: 1%

Colorado: Tossup
Rubio: 38%
Warren: 36%
Sanders: 11%
Paul: 7%

New Jersey: Lean Warren
Warren: 47%
Rubio: 41%
Sanders: 7%
Paul: 1%

Oregon: Tossup
Warren: 39%
Rubio: 37%
Sanders: 14%
Paul: 1%

Illinois: Likely Warren
Warren: 49%
Rubio: 39%
Sanders: 6%
Paul: 1%

North Carolina: Likely Rubio
Rubio: 50%
Warren: 43%
Sanders: 2%
Paul: 1%

Nevada: Lean Rubio
Rubio: 45%
Warren: 40%
Sanders: 6%
Paul: 3%

Georgia: Likely Rubio
Rubio: 52%
Warren: 42%
Sanders: 1%
Paul: 1%

Texas: Likely Rubio
Rubio: 45%
Warren: 35%
Paul: 10%
Sanders: 3%

New Mexico: Lean Warren
Warren: 48%
Rubio: 44%
Paul: 2%
Sanders: 1%

New York: Likely Warren
Warren: 50%
Rubio: 40%
Sanders: 5%
Paul: 1%

National Tracking Poll: 4- Way Race

Rubio: 45% (+5)

Warren: 40%

Sanders: 7%

Paul: 3%

National Tracking Poll: 2 - Way Race

Rubio: 50% (+7)

Warren: 43%